Skip to main content
Glama
lumile

LumbreTravel MCP Server

by lumile

reactivate_leader

Reactivate a travel guide by providing their ID to restore access to LumbreTravel programs and activities.

Instructions

Reactivar un guía

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID del guía a reactivar

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'reactivate_leader' tool including its input schema and description.
    {
      name: 'reactivate_leader',
      description: 'Reactivar un guía',
      inputSchema: { type: 'object', properties: { id: { type: 'string', description: 'ID del guía a reactivar' } }, required: ['id'] }
    },
  • Handler implementation in callTool method that extracts id from args, calls apiService.reactivateLeader(id), and returns the JSON stringified result.
    case 'reactivate_leader': {
      const { id } = args as { id: string }
      const leader = await this.apiService.reactivateLeader(id)
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(leader, null, 2) }]
      }
    }
  • API service helper method that makes a PUT request to the backend to reactivate a leader by ID.
    async reactivateLeader (id: string) {
      const headers = await this.getHeaders()
      const response = await fetch(`${API_CONFIG.baseUrl}/integrations/mcp/leader/reactivate`, {
        method: 'PUT',
        headers,
        body: JSON.stringify({ id })
      })
      return await this.handleResponse<any>(response)
    }
Behavior1/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Reactivar' implies a mutation operation, but the description doesn't specify permissions required, side effects (e.g., changes leader status, affects associated programs), error conditions, or response format. This leaves critical behavioral traits undocumented.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence in Spanish that directly states the tool's action. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no words, making it highly concise and well-structured for its limited content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a mutation tool with unclear behavioral implications, the description is incomplete. It fails to address key contextual aspects like what 'reactivate' entails operationally, success/failure responses, or how it integrates with sibling tools (e.g., 'delete_leader' might deactivate). The high schema coverage doesn't compensate for these gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'id' documented as 'ID del guía a reactivar'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples (e.g., numeric vs. string) or validation rules. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Reactivar un guía' (Reactivate a guide) restates the tool name 'reactivate_leader' with minimal elaboration. It specifies the verb 'reactivar' and resource 'guía', but doesn't clarify what 'reactivate' means in this context (e.g., restoring a deactivated leader, changing status) or how it differs from sibling tools like 'create_leader' or 'update_leader'. The description is tautological rather than informative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., the leader must be deactivated first), exclusions (e.g., cannot reactivate an active leader), or comparisons to sibling tools like 'reactivate_agency' or 'update_leader'. Without any usage context, an agent cannot make informed decisions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lumile/lumbretravel-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server